commondreams.org

cosmic_cowboy, to privacy in A Federal TikTok Ban is a 'Misguided Detour' from Doing What’s Needed to Protect People’s Privacy and Safeguard National Security
@cosmic_cowboy@reddthat.com avatar

In the entirety of my time using the internet, I have heard of the lack of freedom that Chinese citizens face regarding internet access. This has always been held up as indisputable evidence that the CCP is an authoritarian regime, and proof that if the CCP is willing to trample on some freedoms, it’s willing to trample on others.

Just as the U.S. Congress has (somewhat valid) concerns about a foreign entity holding so much sway over such a large platform, it could be stated that these objections are no different from what China claims. If it’s wrong for China to censor and ban platforms, its wrong for the U.S. to do so as well.

Is it concerning how much data is collected by Tik Tok? Yes. But without parroting what’s already been said, this bill comes nowhere close to addressing the key issues of data privacy that it claims to. Banning Tik Tok without addressing the egregious data collection of other platforms is nothing short of hypocracy.

irish_link, to politics in As Biden Plans to Reschedule Marijuana, Advocates Say 'Fully Legalize' It
bquintb, to politics in As Biden Plans to Reschedule Marijuana, Advocates Say 'Fully Legalize' It
@bquintb@midwest.social avatar

DANK BRANDON

someguy3, to politics in As Biden Plans to Reschedule Marijuana, Advocates Say 'Fully Legalize' It

Yes. But in Canada it took a long time to legalize it for whatever lawyering reasons. Long enough that people started to say decriminalize it first just so people wouldn’t get criminal records for it (PSA: decriminalization is not legalization). So yes to both (or all three if you include rescheduling as something).

tearsintherain, to politics in With US Workers on the March, Southern States Take Aim at Unions
@tearsintherain@leminal.space avatar

Republicans love any legislation that creates a situation where working people have to be constantly worried about their livelihoods. This is how you ensure a cheap supply of labor, exploiting human beings.

Maybe someone should put DeSantis and Abbott to work in the heat outdoors and not give them any water breaks, see how they enjoy that. I mean it’s not just inhumane, it can’t be good for business. Unless of course you are in the business of cruelty as conservatives tend to be.

bdonvr, to politics in With US Workers on the March, Southern States Take Aim at Unions

As workers gear up for the election, the Alabama House of Representatives on Tuesday voted 72-30 for a bill that would withhold future economic incentive money from companies that voluntarily recognize unions rather than holding secret ballots. The state Senate previously passed a version of the legislation but now must consider it with the lower chamber’s amendments.

Just completely mask-off

BigMacHole,

Not allowing Workers to Bargain if they want to is called FREEDOM!

FenrirIII,
@FenrirIII@lemmy.world avatar

Isn’t this against the law? Like deciding winners and losers?

bradorsomething,

Pay stupid wages, win stupid product.

itsonlygeorge, (edited ) to politics in With US Workers on the March, Southern States Take Aim at Unions

And yet the Republicans still blame Democrats for their shitty pay, workers rights, and work environment. Yet they keep electing representatives who vote against fucking unions, and all kinds of common sense laws.

And then they blame Democrats because the Republican controlled media tells them those are the bad guys who are ruining their way of life.

They are mad for the right reasons at the wrong people. In reality, the people who are destroying their way of life, are the same people who are supposedly the representatives.

FordBeeblebrox,

If you keep the peasants at each others throats about issues like race or gender identity, they’ll never have time to look up and see where all the fruits of their labor are going. Right now trans folk are the target, closer to the election it’ll be migrant caravans again, it’s the same stupid shit over and over

Facebones, to privacy in A Federal TikTok Ban is a 'Misguided Detour' from Doing What’s Needed to Protect People’s Privacy and Safeguard National Security

A federal tiktok ban is a desperate attempt to keep young people from discussing Joes pet genocide where they can’t be censored by the us govt.

shortwavesurfer,

Except even if they ban TikTok, that won’t work. Because there’s always the fediverse and nostr. If somebody wants to talk about something on social media, they will talk about it, and they will talk about it on services that cannot and or will not ban them. So good luck with that.

xnx,

The fediverse has less than 10M users. Tiktok has a billion. It doesnt compare. Its like saying we should allow banning newspapers or radio because people will still share information over phone calls

shortwavesurfer,

Well, the TikTok users will just have to create fediverse accounts then won’t they?

xnx,

No they wont theyll go to instagram reels since it already is a tiktok clone on an app they already use and already has an algorithm and an infrastructure and is easy to use. Theyll just be fed alt right and anti vax propaganda now instead of all the leftist in depth videos with sources on tiktok that consistently go viral

Facebones,

This. People who believe the reasoning behind this need to understand that the same arguments were made last year and the idea was laughed at.

What’s different is Biden took on another proxy war on the side of genocide and tiktok is the only platform they can’t prevent using the word “genocide”

charonn0,
@charonn0@startrek.website avatar

Which Tittok users has the US government censored?

Facebones,

Somebody needs to work on their reading comprehension 🤔

charonn0,
@charonn0@startrek.website avatar

What do you mean?

davel,
@davel@lemmy.ml avatar

When you run out of evidence, there’s always insults.

Facebones,

Please point to me where I said tiktok users were being censored. 🤔 Learn to read.

davel,
@davel@lemmy.ml avatar

Good point: I didn’t click upthread to see the beginning of the conversation.

Facebones,

I appreciate you. I rescind my snark lol

charonn0,
@charonn0@startrek.website avatar

This part:

a desperate attempt to keep young people from discussing Joes pet genocide where they can’t be censored by the us govt.

suggests that users are being censored by the US government. Doesn’t it?

yogthos, to privacy in A Federal TikTok Ban is a 'Misguided Detour' from Doing What’s Needed to Protect People’s Privacy and Safeguard National Security
@yogthos@lemmy.ml avatar

Let’s face it, the goal was never privacy or security. The killer clowns in charge of US regime are simply upset that there’s a popular social media platform they don’t control. This is about bullying China into selling this platform to US oligarchs. It’s sad and pathetic, and it’s not going to happen.

t7tis,

China chill? The legitimate concern is that China is controlling the way certain messages are pushed (“the algorithms”) to control topics that they have an interest in. I.e. pushing misinformation to drive support for Trump or Biden, as an example. That is not free speech or privacy, that is malicious interference and the the fear of the US doing this is the sole reason China has already banned similar US apps in China. That is also the reason they would rather be banned than to “give up the algorithms” (they certainly won’t allow anyone to see how they push misinformation).

yogthos,
@yogthos@lemmy.ml avatar

LMFAO

TheAnonymouseJoker,

One party scares you dumb people into believing Russia interferes with your elections, the other scares you into thinking China interferes. Meanwhile, all the interference is going on within USA by white house and Congress terrorists.

The reasons China banned US platforms is not the same as ones US is using to do vice versa.

trippingonthewire, to privacy in A Federal TikTok Ban is a 'Misguided Detour' from Doing What’s Needed to Protect People’s Privacy and Safeguard National Security

even worse, this may very well become a “let’s ban whatever we want” type of power to their disposal.

Not Good.

Dagwood222, to politics in How Reaganomics Fueled America's Homelessness Crisis

I was living in New York City in 1981. The homeless population exploded overnight. There were homeless camps all over. They lasted until well into Clinton’s first term.

jeffw,
@jeffw@lemmy.world avatar

That’s also more than just Reaganomics. That’s around when the deinstitutionalization push started. Reagan capitalized on the left’s push to close institutions and he did so without funding any replacement services in the community.

Dagwood222,

Don’t try to blame ‘the left’ for any of this. Reagan did the same thing when he was California governor and had exactly the same results.

Homelessness is great for the Right. Means that there’s a need for more police and jails.

jeffw,
@jeffw@lemmy.world avatar

When did I blame the left? I said Reagan bastardized the left’s campaign fordeinstitutionalization under the guise of supporting them.

some_guy,

Don’t worry, I read your comment as you intended it.

Beetschnapps, (edited )

Yea but Geraldo did the thing and eventually a lot of well meaning concern got co-opted so that republicans could rat-fuck the system.

Dagwood222,

This happened in 1972.

Reagan was Governor of California and closed down mental health facilities back in 1967.

Outtatime, to privacy in A Federal TikTok Ban is a 'Misguided Detour' from Doing What’s Needed to Protect People’s Privacy and Safeguard National Security
@Outtatime@sh.itjust.works avatar

Funny to see a Chinese company talking about “constitutional rights”.

Fidel_Cashflow,
@Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml avatar
GolfNovemberUniform, to privacy in A Federal TikTok Ban is a 'Misguided Detour' from Doing What’s Needed to Protect People’s Privacy and Safeguard National Security
@GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml avatar

Well TikTok is not just bad for privacy but also for mental health and everything else you can possibly think about so probably the ban isn’t actually that bad

shreddy_scientist, (edited )
@shreddy_scientist@lemmy.ml avatar

So Meta, Twitter, Snapchat and all the others who’ve redefined what data collection looks like and keep folks self centered is fine? The only reason the US is throwing this fit is because they can’t access the collected data like they can with US based data brokers, I mean social media. The key aspect of this ban revolves around freedom of speach more than anything else.

GolfNovemberUniform,
@GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml avatar

Of course but still TikTok is not a good thing imo

Ciel,
@Ciel@lemmygrad.ml avatar

I agree, but this is a little off topic imo

GolfNovemberUniform,
@GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml avatar

Can’t agree tbh

charonn0,
@charonn0@startrek.website avatar

No, of course it’s not fine.

But if it’s not fine for domestic social media apps to do it, then it’s even worse for a foreign adversary to do it. Right?

jkrtn,

It is the same worse. Billionaires do not have an allegiance to the well-being of any nation’s citizens. What is a foreign state going to brainwash us with that could possibly be worse than the existing gamer-to-far-right-radical pipeline?

charonn0,
@charonn0@startrek.website avatar

They could use their advertising platform to manipulate US public opinion and elections. And, again, this isn’t to say it’s fine for domestic companies to do this. But that’s no argument against this law. In fact, I daresay the “gamer-to-far-right-radical pipeline” you identify is an example of this.

jkrtn,

I don’t think I would argue against this law, IDK. It’s just a slap in the face to see they recognize how dangerous the thing is.

We always knew they would do nothing to legislate misinformation, bigotry, and electioneering on the US-based platforms. But now we know for a fact that they understand these platforms are weaponized against the public.

dessalines,

Far, far worse for your own country to have that data. If you live in the US for example, facebook can and does forward your messages about getting an abortion to law enforcement if you live in one of the no-abortion states. That mother and daughter both have charges now.

charonn0, to privacy in A Federal TikTok Ban is a 'Misguided Detour' from Doing What’s Needed to Protect People’s Privacy and Safeguard National Security
@charonn0@startrek.website avatar

“If lawmakers want to rein in the harms of social-media platforms, targeting just one under the guise of national security ignores an entire industry predicated on surveillance capitalism. Like all popular platforms — including those that Meta and Google own — TikTok collects far too much user data. But banning a single platform will not address the privacy problem that’s rotting the core of the entire tech industry.

If domestic social media is collecting dangerous amounts of personal info about Americans, then foreign social media under who are subject to the laws of adversarial nation-states should be seriously concerning.

The matter of domestic social media will have to be addressed by a completely different law because it cannot be addressed by a law similar to this new one. People who bring up domestic social media in discussions of this law are completely missing the point.

gassayping,

From what I have seen, most people who object to a federal tiktok ban oppose it because they do not want the US government to censor the internet. I think privacy is brought up as a justification of the ban, and so opponents of the ban argue that it is selective to only focus on the app that is controlled by an adversarial country. I see the ban as addressing a symptom of weak privacy laws instead of addressing the root issue/cause. If privacy were actually taken serious by our government and not enforced selectively, then objections would be a lot less.

charonn0,
@charonn0@startrek.website avatar

I’ve seen that too. But they’re mistaken. “Censoring the internet” is not what this law does. That’s hyperbole not based on any reasonable interpretation of the actual law.

Don’t misunderstand me; this is not a good law. Nobody should be happy about it. But it is prudent, wise and perhaps even necessary. Refusing to acknowledge this while ignoring that actual 1st amendment concerns that this law will be challenged on does not help your argument.

possiblylinux127, to privacy in A Federal TikTok Ban is a 'Misguided Detour' from Doing What’s Needed to Protect People’s Privacy and Safeguard National Security

I might get on Ticktok here soon

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • fightinggames
  • All magazines